Man stabbed on Guildford to London train near Horsley

Status
Not open for further replies.

Stigy

Established Member
Joined
6 Nov 2009
Messages
3,532
Shotguns make a lot of noise and frighten people when they are not expecting them. A shot to the sky can easily deter someone, safer to avoid that area than move towards it. Defence, not assault.

Faced with someone with a knife I would not hesitate to use anything I had to defend my family and myself. You don't have to kill to prevent injury.
And you’d be quite within your rights to use the shotgun on a knifeman....as long as he’s not got his back to you...
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Stigy

Established Member
Joined
6 Nov 2009
Messages
3,532
Has this always been the case? How did crime watch get away with broadcasting all those 'e-fits'?
It’s slightly different when appealing for witnesses to incidents. The police/media can share the images in these cases. I think they still can post sentencing, but what would be the point anyway?
 

Busaholic

Established Member
Joined
7 Jun 2014
Messages
9,352
There'd have been absolutely no problem with police releasing CCTV, or other film/video, footage of the 'suspect' as long as he wasn't described as the murderer on the accompanying voiceover. There is a form of words that's often used e.g. 'the police are extremely anxious to speak to this person' which we all know is euphemistic, but that's the age we live in. Sometimes (but not in this case, obviously) they add 'to eliminate them from our enquiries' which is many cases patently NOT the case!
 

Mathew S

Established Member
Joined
7 Aug 2017
Messages
2,111
It’s slightly different when appealing for witnesses to incidents. The police/media can share the images in these cases. I think they still can post sentencing, but what would be the point anyway?
Yes, if police ask the media to share something as part of an appeal (eg. to locate a dangerous suspect) that's grand. And it's generally okay to name someone once they've been charged with an offence, doesn't (usually) have to wait until conviction/sentencing.
There'd have been absolutely no problem with police releasing CCTV, or other film/video, footage of the 'suspect' as long as he wasn't described as the murderer on the accompanying voiceover. There is a form of words that's often used e.g. 'the police are extremely anxious to speak to this person' which we all know is euphemistic, but that's the age we live in. Sometimes (but not in this case, obviously) they add 'to eliminate them from our enquiries' which is many cases patently NOT the case!
Only if there is a legitimate policing purpose behind releasing the image, otherwise it's still incompatible with Article 8 (right to a private and family life).
 
Last edited:

tiptoptaff

Established Member
Joined
15 Feb 2013
Messages
1,964
Yes, if police ask the media to share something as part of an appeal (eg. to locate a dangerous suspect) that's grand. And it's generally okay to name someone once they've been charged with an offence, doesn't (usually) have to wait until convixtion/sentencing.

Only if there is a legitimate policing purpose behind releasing the image, otherwise it's still incompatible with Article 8 (right to a private and family life).
For clarity to other posters, this is the point at which it becomes a matter of public record, Crown Court cases are open to the public and it's deemed in the public interest to be able to name defendants in a trial. Until that point, it is not in the public interest to name suspects. The reason being is that if a defendant is named during the investigation phase and plastered over the media as a murderer (in this example) it will invietably influence any potential juror's opinion of them and can get the rial thrown out, or lead to the CPS dropping the case as they know that the defending barrister will have a reasonable chance of getting it dismissed on that basis. I'm sure Matthew S will correct me, but this is why the press releases and bulletins follow the pattern of a "25year old man has been arrested in connection with X" and nothing further until "A 25year old man has been charged with X. Joe Bloggs, 25, was arrested last week...." or similar.

This is why Article 8 is so important, even in these cases. As soon as the media names you as something, true or not, it'll stick. And they won't remove web pages that have done so. If I was arrested for murder, and despite being innocent I was named in the press as a the suspect/murderer, it'd be there forever. If anyone ever googled "TipTopTaff" they'd find online news stories saying "TTT arrested for murder" forever and ever, especially as they never normally make a big thing about being released without charge.
 

Statto

Established Member
Joined
8 Feb 2011
Messages
2,290
Location
At home or at the pub
For clarity to other posters, this is the point at which it becomes a matter of public record, Crown Court cases are open to the public and it's deemed in the public interest to be able to name defendants in a trial. Until that point, it is not in the public interest to name suspects. The reason being is that if a defendant is named during the investigation phase and plastered over the media as a murderer (in this example) it will invietably influence any potential juror's opinion of them and can get the rial thrown out, or lead to the CPS dropping the case as they know that the defending barrister will have a reasonable chance of getting it dismissed on that basis. I'm sure Matthew S will correct me, but this is why the press releases and bulletins follow the pattern of a "25year old man has been arrested in connection with X" and nothing further until "A 25year old man has been charged with X. Joe Bloggs, 25, was arrested last week...." or similar.

This is why Article 8 is so important, even in these cases. As soon as the media names you as something, true or not, it'll stick. And they won't remove web pages that have done so. If I was arrested for murder, and despite being innocent I was named in the press as a the suspect/murderer, it'd be there forever. If anyone ever googled "TipTopTaff" they'd find online news stories saying "TTT arrested for murder" forever and ever, especially as they never normally make a big thing about being released without charge.
That doesn't stop the written media though, look at the recent Drone over Gatwick Airport, the couple who got arrested, then got there names plastered all over the media, turns out they were completely innocent, but not before the vitriol they got in the media who assumed they were guilty as charged.
 

A Challenge

Established Member
Joined
24 Sep 2016
Messages
2,245
That doesn't stop the written media though, look at the recent Drone over Gatwick Airport, the couple who got arrested, then got there names plastered all over the media, turns out they were completely innocent, but not before the vitriol they got in the media who assumed they were guilty as charged.
They weren't ever even charged (which is when the media is allowed to name them!)
 

tiptoptaff

Established Member
Joined
15 Feb 2013
Messages
1,964
That doesn't stop the written media though, look at the recent Drone over Gatwick Airport, the couple who got arrested, then got there names plastered all over the media, turns out they were completely innocent, but not before the vitriol they got in the media who assumed they were guilty as charged.
Yes, indeed, leaked by "friends" apparently. And I am sure there will be consequences. Just because they did it doesn't mean they're allowed.
 

Deepgreen

Established Member
Joined
12 Jun 2013
Messages
4,576
Location
Betchworth, Surrey
Very blasé and nonchalant response from user LowLevel when a violent "random frenzied" murder has taken place on a train and it could have been the train guard as the victim. The assailant hasn't been found and is still on the loose, what if he and boards another train and murders someone else??? You need an army on these trains....
Don't agree that 'LowLevel' appeared blase - "horrible and shocking" was the phrase used. Accidents and serious assaults will always happen, and society has to carry on (ideally, while learning lessons). If an army is needed on "these trains" (i.e. Surrey commuter) what is needed on, say, inner city streets, buses, etc? It obviously cannot, and will not, be done. If someone is intent on, or prepared to commit, crime, it will happen anywhere. The fact that the suspect was carrying a blade (or managed to obtain a stabbing implement from somewhere on the train) points to a willingness to use it at some point.
 

Mathew S

Established Member
Joined
7 Aug 2017
Messages
2,111
For clarity to other posters, this is the point at which it becomes a matter of public record, Crown Court cases are open to the public and it's deemed in the public interest to be able to name defendants in a trial. Until that point, it is not in the public interest to name suspects. The reason being is that if a defendant is named during the investigation phase and plastered over the media as a murderer (in this example) it will invietably influence any potential juror's opinion of them and can get the rial thrown out, or lead to the CPS dropping the case as they know that the defending barrister will have a reasonable chance of getting it dismissed on that basis. I'm sure Matthew S will correct me, but this is why the press releases and bulletins follow the pattern of a "25year old man has been arrested in connection with X" and nothing further until "A 25year old man has been charged with X. Joe Bloggs, 25, was arrested last week...." or similar.

This is why Article 8 is so important, even in these cases. As soon as the media names you as something, true or not, it'll stick. And they won't remove web pages that have done so. If I was arrested for murder, and despite being innocent I was named in the press as a the suspect/murderer, it'd be there forever. If anyone ever googled "TipTopTaff" they'd find online news stories saying "TTT arrested for murder" forever and ever, especially as they never normally make a big thing about being released without charge.
Absolutely correct. Worth also saying that if you publish something which the court views as having been likely to influence the outcome of the trial - whether intentionally or not - you can be found in contempt for which the maximum penalty is two years imprisonment.
That doesn't stop the written media though, look at the recent Drone over Gatwick Airport, the couple who got arrested, then got there names plastered all over the media, turns out they were completely innocent, but not before the vitriol they got in the media who assumed they were guilty as charged.
It *should* stop the written media. If I were the lawyer for any of the papers who published the names I would be heartily wishing I had a different job right now.
 

londonbridge

Member
Joined
30 Jun 2010
Messages
879
Absolutely correct. Worth also saying that if you publish something which the court views as having been likely to influence the outcome of the trial - whether intentionally or not - you can be found in contempt for which the maximum penalty is two years imprisonment.
You may have seen video of an incident at a Tesco store in which other shoppers were trying to prevent a couple of shoplifters from escaping in a car. On another forum which I frequent, someone who claims to have been one of the other shoppers involved has posted their version of what happened, this person could potentially be in trouble.
 

Mathew S

Established Member
Joined
7 Aug 2017
Messages
2,111
You may have seen video of an incident at a Tesco store in which other shoppers were trying to prevent a couple of shoplifters from escaping in a car. On another forum which I frequent, someone who claims to have been one of the other shoppers involved has posted their version of what happened, this person could potentially be in trouble.
I'm not familiar with the details of the incident but, as a general point, yes it's always safest to avoid any kind of comment on a live case.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

jon0844

Veteran Member
Joined
1 Feb 2009
Messages
24,467
Location
UK
You may have seen video of an incident at a Tesco store in which other shoppers were trying to prevent a couple of shoplifters from escaping in a car. On another forum which I frequent, someone who claims to have been one of the other shoppers involved has posted their version of what happened, this person could potentially be in trouble.
I saw that (Digital Spy) and the poster does appear to have been told off by quite a few people. It was interesting to find out exactly what happened before the filming, which was more or less what I imagined.. Clearly once someone had been seriously injured, it prompted the action filmed to try and stop the vehicle leaving - rather than members of the public just going mad over someone having stolen a few beers (or whatever) from the store.
 

Dr_Paul

Member
Joined
3 Sep 2013
Messages
797
No-one needs to carry a knife around with them in public in ordinary circumstances.
When I worked in a warehouse in Shepherds Bush some 30 years back, I used to take in my kitchen knives, one of which had a 10" blade, to sharpen on the grinding wheel we had there when they became a bit blunt (it put a superb edge on them). Although this was long before knife-crime became common and although I used to wrap them securely in thick cardboard with parcel-tape and put them in a bag, I used to wonder what might happen were I to get randomly searched en route on the bus, train or underground -- 'Hello, hello, hello, what all this then?'
 

Elecman

Established Member
Joined
31 Dec 2013
Messages
2,024
Location
Lancashire
I have a 3ft Machete in the back of my vehicle that I regularly use to hack down overgrowth on public highways when accessing DNO cubicles for work. Only had the Police called to me once:D:D
 

Robsignals

On Moderation
Joined
3 Aug 2012
Messages
424
Sympathys to the family. An arrest made so quickly suggests police immediately had a suspect in mind, needing extra time that there's a lack of forensic evidence. In general it's tragic that the police know of people that are likely to kill one day but can't do anything until someone is attacked.
 

Stigy

Established Member
Joined
6 Nov 2009
Messages
3,532
I used to wonder what might happen were I to get randomly searched en route on the bus, train or underground -- 'Hello, hello, hello, what all this then?'
Nothing would happen. If the knives are safely wrapped or packaged and it’s not believed you intended to use them for committing an offence, you’d have no issues. It’s clearly different to having a knife tucked down your trousers or a baseball bat on your oassger seat whilst driving down the road.
 

Antman

Established Member
Joined
3 May 2013
Messages
6,597
Sympathys to the family. An arrest made so quickly suggests police immediately had a suspect in mind, needing extra time that there's a lack of forensic evidence. In general it's tragic that the police know of people that are likely to kill one day but can't do anything until someone is attacked.
Needing extra time could be for any number of reasons, you seem to be making a lot of assumptions.
 

A Challenge

Established Member
Joined
24 Sep 2016
Messages
2,245
My cousin commutes into Central London to work as a chef and is generally travelling home on one of the last trains, and although it is less often now he sometimes has to take all of his knives with him. I believe he has a locked case he keeps them in.
 

70014IronDuke

Established Member
Joined
13 Jun 2015
Messages
2,769
...

This is welcome news. It's an awful thing to have happened but at least we know the culript isn't on the loose.
.. .
But we don't, do we? It's comforting, I agree, but we only know that the suspected culprit isn't on the loose (or at least at the time you posted this, in case anything has moved on since).
 

Busaholic

Established Member
Joined
7 Jun 2014
Messages
9,352
Yes, if police ask the media to share something as part of an appeal (eg. to locate a dangerous suspect) that's grand. And it's generally okay to name someone once they've been charged with an offence, doesn't (usually) have to wait until conviction/sentencing.

Only if there is a legitimate policing purpose behind releasing the image, otherwise it's still incompatible with Article 8 (right to a private and family life).
Are you suggesting there wouldn't be a legitimate policing purpose behind releasing the image(s) in these circumstances?
 

muz379

Established Member
Joined
23 Jan 2014
Messages
1,828
When I worked in a warehouse in Shepherds Bush some 30 years back, I used to take in my kitchen knives, one of which had a 10" blade, to sharpen on the grinding wheel we had there when they became a bit blunt (it put a superb edge on them). Although this was long before knife-crime became common and although I used to wrap them securely in thick cardboard with parcel-tape and put them in a bag, I used to wonder what might happen were I to get randomly searched en route on the bus, train or underground -- 'Hello, hello, hello, what all this then?'
Law says that you cannot carry a knife in public without good reason unless the blade is under 3 inches long and its a folding knife . Should the police come to discover your knives and charge you with carrying them illegally it would be for a Court to decide if the reason given is good reason . I would say in these circumstances it is unlikely the police would show any interest
 

Mathew S

Established Member
Joined
7 Aug 2017
Messages
2,111
Are you suggesting there wouldn't be a legitimate policing purpose behind releasing the image(s) in these circumstances?
Not for me to make that judgement, but the only circumstances I can think of that would constitute a "legitimate policing purpose" would be either a public appeal to locate a suspect or (not relevant in this case) an appeal for victims/witnesses to assist in building a case. In this specific case, difficult to see either of those justifications being applicable.

You'll note that now people have been charged, they can be - and are being - named.
 

theageofthetra

Established Member
Joined
27 May 2012
Messages
3,143
Not for me to make that judgement, but the only circumstances I can think of that would constitute a "legitimate policing purpose" would be either a public appeal to locate a suspect or (not relevant in this case) an appeal for victims/witnesses to assist in building a case. In this specific case, difficult to see either of those justifications being applicable.

You'll note that now people have been charged, they can be - and are being - named.
Now that two people have been charged why haven't their pictures been released?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top